Glock 42

The interweb is all abuzz about Glock’s soon to be released model 42 chambered in .380. I have not gotten my hands on one and it is unlikely I will anytime soon, but looking at the rumored specs, I have to admit I am not very optimistic about Glock’s latest offering.

Before you haters pipe up let me make something clear – I really like Glocks – the ones that live up to Glock’s reputation for reliability. The 3rd generation 9mm Glocks are probably the most reliable semi-automatic pistols ever made. I depend on a G17 (duty), G26 (BUG) and G19 (off duty CCW/plain clothes) every day. I have shot almost 30,000 rounds through my 17 and can count the malfunctions I’ve had on two fingers. I have NEVER had a malfunction with my 19. However, the problems with the gen3 G22 when used in conjunction with a weapon mounted light have not been fixed with the fourth generation model. Law enforcement agencies across the country continue to have problems with the G22 when used with a weapon light. Glock needs to re-design the 22 from the ground up, but so far has shown an unwillingness to do this.

Back to the Glock 42. Clearly, this is Glock’s long-awaited (overdue) entry into the “pocket pistol” market, dominated primarily by the Ruger LCP, Smith and Wesson Bodyguard and to a lesser extent, the Kel Tec P380. (We compared the Ruger LCP and S&W Bodyguard some time ago in: Deep Concealment Pistols: Ruger LCP vs. Smith and Wesson Bodyguard). What these pocket pistols lack in firepower, many argue they make up for in ease of carry and concealability. The adage “a small gun carried with you is better than a large gun left at home” applies.

Then it should go without saying, if you’re going to manufacture a pistol that is on the bottom end of the firepower spectrum, you better make it easy to carry and conceal. Unfortunately, at least on paper, the Glock 42 is larger and heavier than both the LCP and Bodyguard:

The Glock is longer by almost 3/4 of an inch, taller by half an inch, slightly wider and heavier than the Bodyguard or LCP. For a pistol that you’re supposed to be able to drop in your shorts pocket, that’s kind of a big deal. The Glock trigger should be better as both the LCP and S&W, but frankly these aren’t firearms where long range, precision fire will likely be that important. Both the LCP and Bodyguard have proven to be reliable. While Glock has certainly made many reliable firearms, as evidenced by the ongoing problems with the .40 caliber line, we won’t know how reliable the G42 is until we can run some rounds through it.

On paper, the G42 looks under-powered for its size, or over-sized for its power – but there may be a silver lining to all this. Since the beginning of time, Glock aficionados have been asking – begging – for a single stack, 9mm pistol. Instead, Glock gave us pistols chambered in .357 Sig and (snicker) the 45 GAP. Looking at the G42 specs, a pistol this size would be very competitive with the current 9mm single-stack offering from Smith and Wesson, the Shield. In the past, Glock modified its 9mm firearms to fit the .40 caliber round – a popular theory as to why the G22 has been so temperamental over the years.

Could it be Glock has learned from it’s past – and overbuilt the G42 around the 9mm cartridge? Could a similar-sized single-stack 9mm Glock be just around the corner? Given Glock’s history of puzzling development decisions, I wouldn’t hold my breath, but hey – one can always dream.

***UPDATE*** Since this post we’ve had the chance to put some rounds through the G42. While we stand by our initial assessment that this gun is not really a “pocket pistol,” we were very impressed with how well it shoots. You can read more details and see comparison photos at http://progunfighter.com/glock-42-review/